Question about the Great Schism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wesley7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Same rule applies for the Immaculate heart of Mary and Jesus Christ, thank you, when both are venerated in the Catholic Church pre-schism and post-schism
 
The magnitude of this situation we don’t even know yet? There were 45-Million Christians martyred last century. We only know the bigger names. All this is still on-going from last century in investigation. Which just points to history and change. This war of Good and evil didn’t stop cold in 1000-AD.

Can we honestly say any one of the Martyrs from last century is any less significant than those from 800 or 200 or pre schism?

If Constantine gave a lot, he had a lot to give. That doesn’t mean others didn’t give all.

God Bless, Gary
 
I agree including the on going of Catholic martyrs today, many of them have disappeared from the face of the earth and many others who have been killed for being Christian in our time, have yet to be accounted for, because the numbers are staggering and continue to grow.

The apostles canonized? why?

The point is what difference does it make in regards to veneration of the Saints be it pre-schism or post schism?

Why question the veneration and private devotion to Jesus Christ and Mary’s Immaculate hearts, be it pre-schism or post-schism? The message never changes “repent and believe the gospels”.
 
I don’t think he meant both? But we never disagreed that Constantine is a canonized Saint within the Orthodox Catholic Rite (s).
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
Well then, you pose a contradiction of faith here; According to the posting here, anything post schism is “New”.
Click to expand...
Since you are misrepresenting what I originally wrote in order to make an argument about an unrelated issue, I should remind you that I (not Hesychios) originally wrote that the devotion to the sacred heart and immaculate heart are relatively new, and that the roots of the devotion are in 11th-12th century developments in Benedictine monasteries. If you have a problem with that, please take it up with the Catholic Encyclopedia which I have quoted and linked where it says that. Furthermore, Bluegoat reminded us that the actual devotions themselves (as something considered separately than the theological developments they are supported by) are even newer. This is not some sort of slight against the Roman Catholic Church, only a part of why I personally find them to be on shaky ground, historically. Certainly there are ideas that have circulated from before the schism(s) that were and are heretical regardless of their antiquity. Please do not misrepresent what I say in order to have a separate argument unrelated to the Sacred/Immaculate Hearts devotions. Do not bring in Hesychios or a bunch of unrelated business about different saints that have nothing to do with these devotions.
Correction; Constantine is never a canonized or venerated as a st. in the Roman Catholic Church, only in Your Catholic Rite.
Click to expand...
Hesychios is not Catholic, so he has no “Catholic Rite”. The Orthodox Church is in no sense a “rite” within the Roman Catholic communion
 
dzheremi;7977373]
Click to expand...
Hesychios is not Catholic, so he has no “Catholic Rite”. The Orthodox Church is in no sense a “rite” within the Roman Catholic communion
Click to expand...
I would like to hear it from Hesychios that he is not Catholic.🤷

True there are technicalities that are not seen on the surface of these posts, but never the less both Orthodox and Catholic Church’s remain “Catholic”. From this reality, personal objections, opinions may range high and low, but no man can “put asunder what God has joined together”.

You have to forgive me, (but you may not remember, support was given you in regards to body parts and the post, pre-schism issues, from other posters here) for generalizing and grouping the rebuttal in one post, sorry.

Are you going to respond to my post in regards to venerating Jesus body and blood?🙂 And clear up these body part discrepancies.

Peace be with you, and thank you for your posts:thumbsup:
 
dzheremi;7977373] If you have a problem with that, please take it up with the Catholic Encyclopedia which I have quoted and linked where it says that. Furthermore, Bluegoat reminded us that the actual devotions themselves (as something considered separately than the theological developments they are supported by) are even newer. This is not some sort of slight against the Roman Catholic Church, only a part of why I personally find them to be on shaky ground, historically.
Click to expand...
Lol…“find them to be on shaky ground, historically”? When Jesus built his church upon Rock. What irony, that it relates to an oxymoron.

First of all dzheremi, the Encyclopedia does not practice a devotion to the Immaculate heart of Mary and Jesus. It is a commentary of summary, not a real live person speaking to you who practices this devotion.

There is nothing new when Catholics venerate Jesus, the Saints, the body and blood of Jesus, the Rosary mysteries, venerate the holy virgin Mother of God.

The method is what is new, not the practice or the faith. Your enclopedia and bluegoat only reveal the method. What I introduce to you is the pre-schism faith practiced unchanged in the post-schism method of praying, meditating on the Word of God made flesh (gospels) and veneration of Saints, including the Immaculate heart of Jeus and Mary. The Catholic faith remains “Rock” unchanged in these mysteries which man can never exhaust no matter what method one prescribes, so long as the gospel message, the Catholic faith does not change. The method does not harm the Catholic faith, it helps the faithful grow as Gary Taylor so eloquently stated.

Peace be with you
 
Gabriel, I know you mean well, but it is pointless to try to converse with you when you conflate so many different practices and issues in your attempt to defend a single practice (or pair of practices, I suppose). I personally do not see how the cult of devotion to the hearts of Jesus and Mary is related to the foundation of Christ’s church, Constantine, etc. I have given my own reasons for disapproving of the practices in question, and I feel that all that is left to specify is that even if the devotions to the hearts dated to a pre-schism period, I would still view them with suspicion, as a result of my commitment to the integrity (in this case, literally) of Christ and His saints. As I have written earlier, it is not right to vivisect Jesus Christ or the Theotokos in worship or for worship. That really is the long and the short of it.
 
In my church (the Ukrainian CATHOLIC church) we venerate St. Constantine as a saint. So yes he is a saint recognized in the catholic church.
 
dzheremi said:
As I have written earlier, it is not right to vivisect Jesus Christ or the Theotokos in worship or for worship. That really is the long and the short of it.
Click to expand...
How do you see the negative when the results are positive by increased worship in submission and reverence to the Apostolic Church?

The result is the focus on Trinity in the first, second and third person. The submission to Mary in reverence or the Holy Family for that matter is just a fact in Christianity.

As far as the Saints. Its far by me to judge these Souls that santified the ground with there Blood.

Do you believe the Blessed Mother situation is blown out of proportion? No doubt the last century bought an advancement to the submission of Mary. Nonetheless all her intercesion is directed to the Trinity in total submission to God for mankind?

The daily recitation of the Rosary alone has to have a profound effect. How can the unity of Christians in submission and reverence to God be anything but right?

God Bless, Gary
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
Correction; Constantine is never a canonized or venerated as a st. in the Roman Catholic Church, only in Your Catholic Rite.
Click to expand...
Are you trying to dismiss what Eastern Catholics believe as irrelevant?

Your reasons for not recognizing Saint Constantine were pretty harsh. It sounds like quite a smear against your eastern Catholic coreligionists.

But if you don’t think of them as real Catholics I guess that would make sense from your perspective.
 
dzheremi;7977501]Gabriel, I know you mean well, but it is pointless to try to converse with you when you conflate so many different practices and issues in your attempt to defend a single practice (or pair of practices, I suppose). I personally do not see how the cult of devotion to the hearts of Jesus and Mary is related to the foundation of Christ’s church, Constantine, etc.
Click to expand...
The different practices deal with same subject matter of veneration and devotion. Be it post or pre-schism, be it a Saint cannonized post schism who is venerated or a devotion to the Immaculate heart of Mary and Jesus post-schism, both have biblical and Sacred Traditional foundations. I was responding to you and the posters, who brought the subject of pre-schism and post-schism practices.

I related that no difference can be found in the practice of venerations of New Cannonized Saints in the Catholic Church, be it pre- or post-schism.
I have given my own reasons for disapproving of the practices in question, and I feel that all that is left to specify is that even if the devotions to the hearts dated to a pre-schism period, I would still view them with suspicion, as a result of my commitment to the integrity (in this case, literally) of Christ and His saints.
Click to expand...
The blessed virgin Holy Mother of God is queen of Saints, we have not drawn of course here, thus veneration is the practice we are discussing and hope to clarify.

You have revealed here that the reason for your disapproval deals with a “word” heart from the Catholic encyclopedia, that is understandable. What I hoped to clarify to you, is that your interpretation of the encyclopedia differs from the understanding of “heart”.

When you pointed out it is natural as one who vivisect Jesus and Mary which contradicts this devotion, when the devotion to the Immaculate heart of Mary is symbolic.

“The devotion to the Immaculate heart of Mary recognizes and honors the heart of Mary as a Symbol of the reality of her Love; Her act of putting her conscious, intelligent, and free personality completely at the disposal of the salvific Love of God and the redemption of the world (this is apostolic and pre-schism). For this reason, the devotion to the Heart of Mary has great spiritual value to draw and direct our wills and our lives toward Christ and toward others; as an efficacious sign of grace”…
quote from Catholic biblical theologians who wrote “The Dictionary Of Mary” pg196 and who practice this devotion to the Immaculate heart of Jesus and Mary, they also give strong biblical references and Sacred Traditions which stem from these devotions of Mary, which proves this devotion to Saint Mary’s Love from her heart.
As I have written earlier, it is not right to vivisect Jesus Christ or the Theotokos in worship or for worship. That really is the long and the short of it.
Click to expand...
You have to prove how this devotion to the Love from Mary’s heart revealed in scripture “vivisects” her heart? Please tell me how you see this without misrepresenting the word “heart” from the encylopedia?

Referencing the OP here, in regards to the schism. This fundamental misunderstanding, misrepresentation, false accusations and mis-interpretations is the most profound undertaking still haunting this so called “Great schism”.

To solve this problem, as everyone ponders is very simple… It is the Universal language that all peoples, nations, and tongues can “all” understand without misrepresentation. I can sum it all up in one word… “LOVE”.

This is the Immaculate heart of Mary and Jesus = LOVE. That is why Mary prophesized, that the Holy Father is to “concencrate my Immaculate heart to Russia”, before “communism took over”.

Pope Pius XII (May 4, 1944) consecrated the world wide Christian family and the whole human race to the Immaculate heart of Mary with this LOVE and Grace.

There is much more to reveal here in regards to LOVE from the Immaculate heart of Mary and Jesus, but this is heavens answer to the schism.

Peace be with you
 
GaryTaylor said:
How do you see the negative when the results are positive by increased worship in submission and reverence to the Apostolic Church?
Click to expand...
Even if this were the result of this practice (which I don’t know how it is possible to know, but I’ll take your word for it), it wouldn’t matter. It is unorthodox. The idea that we should not care about the content of ideas and practices if the results are pleasing is just madness. Is the Catholic Church a house of God or a corporation? I don’t see the former in this way of thinking. To paraphrase the Holy Bible, what good does it do a church to gain the whole world if in the process it loses its way, which is (or ought to be) the way of Christ and the holy apostles and disciples?

We must always strive to be orthodox rather than popular. If, in a given case, the two are one and the same, then that’s wonderful. Keep on the straight path. But if they are not (and I suspect that this is more often the case, at least in most places), then no matter. Keep on the straight path. If a popular devotion is contrary to the orthodox faith, it would not become acceptable even if publicly endorsed by the Pope himself.
 
Side comment here in regards to devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary…I have worked in missions and lay apostolate back home…

We see Mary as the archenemy of Satan…Our local Catholic radio station was named in honor of Mary; you hear all these stories from workers who were beginning to establish this radio station and all the troubles going on to set it up.

It isn’t this symbol of her heart. We are most aware that this devotion in the apostolic life is knowing the living presence of Gentle Mary, yet so powerful against Satan and the devils going into higher force with each passing day…just look at the world news, etc…

Again, we are experiencing in this devotion to her heart, ongoing renewal and healing, a living Mary most present and active us to discern the Lord’s will. We are hoping and working towards the coming reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus throughout the world…where Christ will help people return to love of God and love of neighbor through His presence in our hearts.

I am returning to my neglected devotion to the Sacred Heart, and through will effort on my part due to my lapses and distractions, I am becoming much more at peace and not so worried about the events surrounding me.

These devotions help me to recognize that Christ has already won, that He is King of this universe…and all we do in our part is to be nourished by the Blood of the Lamb and stand firm…the victory is Christ’s.

When people tend to pull away or even denigrate these devotions, they just simply are not aware of all the grace and power of goodness that comes from Christ and Mary.

We are coming to the end of the Age of Mary; what is forthcoming is the Glory of the Holy Trinity.

And there is great grace in accepting the seat of Peter…who holds the keys to the Body and Blood of Christ.
 
Hesychios;7979422]Are you trying to dismiss what Eastern Catholics believe as irrelevant?
Click to expand...
Your reasons for not recognizing Saint Constantine were pretty harsh. It sounds like quite a smear against your eastern Catholic coreligionists.
Click to expand...
But if you don’t think of them as real Catholics I guess that would make sense from your perspective.
Click to expand...
Peace be with you Hesychios. I will answer your questions here.
  1. No I am not trying to dismiss what Eastern Catholics believe at any time past, present or future.
  2. I do not speak for my Catholic faith here, I pointed out my personal reasons why I do not venerate Constantine as a Saint. Truth can be harsh, history is on my side here for my opinions. It may have been a bad example I can admit, to use here to reveal that both East and West can have different devotions and venerations of Saints, this never justifies any reason to try and defame or discredit ones personal devotion, especially when it deals with Love.
  3. I assure you, by the Grace of God, I never view my Eastern Orthodox Catholics as non-Catholics. You know very well my position on this, from my previous post “no man can put asunder what God has joined together”, I reference the Eastern and Western Church.
A thousand years is like a day unto God, it has been a thousand years since the schism, God’s patience can out do man’s. If God wills, God can wait another 1000 years, for to him it is but a day, but I don’t think God will wait more than a week, for this schism to heal itself.

We either follow the example of LOVE His Son and His Blessed Mother gave us, or we can do it alone. I as a Catholic will try the way of LOVE through the Immaculate hearts of Mary and Jesus.

Peace be with you
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
You have revealed here that the reason for your disapproval deals with a “word” heart from the Catholic encyclopedia, that is understandable. What I hoped to clarify to you, is that your interpretation of the encyclopedia differs from the understanding of “heart”.
Click to expand...
I am done discussing this matter with you, but I feel like I should clarify this point for your benefit and the benefit of anyone else reading.

Yes, I did write that it’s the “heart” part of the devotion that I have a problem with, but please do not assume that this means that it is the actual word that gives me pause, so that you need only describe it in more detail and it will be fine. What I meant was that it is obviously not wrong to venerate the Theotokos as befits her, but this particular cult of devotion takes a right belief (that St. Mary is to be venerated) and twists it to support a very odd and suspicious practice (devotion to her “immaculate heart”). It is not up to me to say that the symbol, used as a metaphor for something deeper, is inherently wrong in this case any more than it could be inherently wrong for St. Patrick to have famously used the clover to teach the Trinity to his countrymen. The difference is, of course, that no “cult of the clover” was allowed to develop in the Irish church, wherein (to make an excruciatingly correct parallel to the sorts of paraphernalia that accompany Catholic “heart devotions”) a theology was constructed around the symbol (rather than the other way around, as in the case of St. Patrick and the clover), complete with paintings and other aides to worship showing the clover itself in an elevated position. That would be disturbing, would it not? There is a fine line to be drawn with the metaphors and arguments we use so that we are not inadvertently leading others astray. As Andrew pointed out earlier (and I concur, lest anyone think otherwise), these heart devotions are of course not meant to push the boundaries of orthodox theology and practice, but as they are practiced that is what has happened.
 
dzheremi said:
It is unorthodox
Click to expand...
Well there it is! Unfortunate though since its very Catholic;) as KathleenGee elaborated on.

dzheremi if Catholics were baptized day through night for 10 years straight in Mexico due to that event. How do explain it when all that existed was Mary’s intercession? It was a total converstion of a country. Which btw Catholic missionarys could not get the Aztecs to convert for years.

Its not the only country this has happened in. How do you not see this? You make it sound like fairy tales.🙂 When its historic fact.

God Bless, Gary
 
dzheremi said:
We must always strive to be orthodox rather than popular.
Click to expand...
I think the dichotomy expressed is wrong, and potentially dangerously so. We do not seek to be a remnant church. We must maintain orthodoxy, and we must strive to make orthodoxy “popular”.
 
Madre de Dios, what do Mexicans have to do with ANYTHING? La Virgen and the tilma and all that stuff is no more an endorsement of a particular practice any more than we could say that when people see St. Mary or Jesus Christ in the burn patterns on their grilled cheese sandwich (and don’t laugh; I’ve seen the E-bay auction for said sandwich and it had far too many bids on it to be funny) it is a sign from the Divine that they ought to eat more grilled cheese.

A stupid comparison, no doubt, but it is to prove a point: Devotions are for the devoted, without reference to any supposed miracle or resulting good fortune, precisely because our faith is NOT to be based on that! “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign”, remember? In light of that, it certainly makes no sense to look to a supposed miracle to substantiate the faith (“blessed are those who have not seen, yet believe”), and even less sense to use any particular event or miracle to establish or legitimize a given practice (to connect this to the wider theme of this conversation).

Miracles attest to faith, but cannot create it. Notice that for those without faith, nothing is miraculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top